As reports of farmers taking their lives due to the burden of loans they have taken from banks to run their farming continue to emerge from across the country, total bad debts of corporate houses worth Rs 9.87 lakh crore between 2014 and September 30, 2025 were written off by the Central government, while the agriculture sector received relief of only Rs 1.67 lakh crore during the same period; in percentage terms, the corporate sector accounted for 85.5 per cent of the benefit, while poor farmers received just 14.5 per cent.
The figures were disclosed in the Rajya Sabha in response to a question raised by environmentalist and Member of Parliament Sant Balbir Singh Seechewal, whose intervention has once again brought the issue of agrarian distress and policy asymmetry into sharp focus.
According to the data furnished by the government, out of the total corporate loan write-offs, Rs 7.21 lakh crore pertained to large industrial loans, while more than Rs 2.65 lakh crore was written off in favour of big business entities under various banking provisions, reflecting the scale at which institutional relief has been extended to the corporate sector.
In contrast, loan write-offs relating to agriculture and allied activities have remained limited, even as farmers across the country continue to face repeated crop failures, extreme weather events linked to climate change, rising input costs and stagnant incomes, all of which have deepened rural indebtedness. The disproportionate allocation of relief, critics argue, exposes a structural bias in economic policy that prioritises industrial balance sheets over agrarian survival.
Reacting to the data, Seechewal contended that the government’s repeated attempt to draw a distinction between loan write-offs and loan waivers was misleading in substance, as corporate write-offs effectively provide tangible financial relief, while farmers are denied comparable support on the grounds of fiscal discipline and conditionality.
He maintained that when corporate borrowers default on loans running into thousands of crores, the amounts are quietly removed from bank books in the name of policy, whereas farmers driven into debt by adverse weather conditions, crop losses and the absence of a legally guaranteed Minimum Support Price are compelled to navigate complex eligibility norms or are excluded altogether.
Questioning what he described as a double standard in banking and policymaking, Seechewal asked why institutions capable of absorbing massive corporate losses display reluctance when it comes to extending relief to farmers, despite agriculture remaining the backbone of food security and rural employment.
He also pointed out that during the COVID-19 pandemic, when industries and businesses were largely shut down, it was the farming sector that sustained the population and prevented a deeper economic collapse in rural areas.
The MP further noted that while farmer indebtedness continues to rise, the government has stopped maintaining official data on farmer suicides, a move he said has further marginalised the agrarian crisis and weakened policy accountability.
During the Winter Session of Parliament, he had also questioned the Union Agriculture Minister on the issue of farmer suicides and the denial of Minimum Support Price, but the response, he said, failed to address the concerns and instead appeared to cast doubts on the very need to track such data.